THE LORD'S SUPPER

THE SCENE IN 1985

 

What of the Church of England today? Is it still Reformed and Protestant – the church that Hooper and Ridley and the martyred reformers would wish to belong to? Does Latimer’s candle still burn in England? These are hard questions. And they demand a very hard and mixed answer.

 

The Church of England is under attack on all sides. Just as in the middle Ages when the true followers of Christ suffered under the cruel repression and persecution of Rome, just as in the days of Mary Tudor, and as in the days of Archbishop Laud, so is the Church of England today under threat and in peril. The reformed Protestant Church of England is under attack from two principle directions: the extreme Anglo Catholic Movement on the one hand, and the extreme liberal movement on the other. Between these two extremes the true reformed teaching of the Church of England, though squeezed and hindered, is still upheld.

 

One of the benefits of the Church of England has always been her broadness. There is room for those of varying degrees of Churchmanship. However, the present situation is not a beneficial broadness, nor is it a tolerable one. The limits of the Church have been broken. On one side there are men of authority and position in the Church, men of considerable influence who openly deny some of the essentials of the gospel, down-grading the Lord and his Word, the Bible. On the other side there are those who effectively bury the gospel under the sacraments and a whole heap of superstition and idolatrous innovations. Never more so than now did the Church of England need to mark our Lord’s warning in Matthew 16 verses 5-12: “Take heed and beware the yeast (doctrine/teaching) of the Pharisees and Sadducees”. With his clear insight into human weakness and tendency to sin, he knew that his Church would never be free from error. He knew that there would always be those who would seek to add to the gospel the things of men, and that there would always be those who would seek to subtract from the gospel some of its essential truths. The Jewish sects of the Pharisees and the Sadducees died out soon after the time of the apostles, but their spiritual successors have continued throughout the history of the Church. They are seen today in the extreme Anglo-Catholic Movement on one hand and the followers of extreme liberal theology on the other. When these two combine they form one of the deadliest foes to the gospel. In the so-called Anglo-Catholic Movement we so often see a combination of Romish views of the Church and extreme liberal theology concerning the Bible!

 

Beyond doubt, the martyred reformers would wring their hands in horror if they were permitted to look on their church today. Wherever Latimer’s candle still flickers, it does so in spite of the tendencies that have spread through the Church of England since the days of Archbishop Laud.

 

We concentrate our attention on the Service of Holy Communion as it is seen in the Church of England in the late twentieth century. The view is very diverse. Reflections are seen of every standpoint from that of the reformers to that of the Church of Rome. Error exists and it may be exposed. Those who love the truth and have a concern for God’s people are right to denounce error in the Church when that error threatens the spiritual life of the Church itself. No doubt they will be labelled, “narrow”, “uncharitable”, “alarmists” and “opponents of unity”; but there comes a time when truth must not be suppressed for the sake of unity or what passes for peace. That time has come in the Church of England.

 

In many of our Churches the Communion Service has ceased to be a fair representation of the biblical institution, and ceased to be the service envisaged by the reformers. What are the symptoms of these errors and by what standards may they be judged error according to the Church of England’s teaching formularies?

 

Error exists wherever man and women believe the blessing of receiving Communion to be in the actual act of eating and drinking the sacramental elements, rather than in the simple obedience to Christ’s command and in the powerful illustration to the mind of feeding on Christ which the Lord’s Supper provides. There is no lack of men of authority in the Church who seek to encourage this subtle but deadly change in emphasis. The following are the most obvious practices which encourage false notions:

 

1. The minister consecrates the bread and wine whilst standing in the position of a ‘Sacrificing Priest’, facing the table with his back to the people. (The practice is not allowed by the rubric of the Book of Common Prayer).

2. The minister lifts the bread and wine above his head at the moment of consecration. (A bell may be rung at this point). Historically, this is the moment when the bread and wine are supposed to change, (The practice is outlawed by Article 28).

3. The minister bows down to the consecrated elements. This gives the impression that a change has taken place in them. (This idolatrous practice is outlawed by Article 28 and by the note at the end of the Communion Service – Book of Common Prayer).

4. Some of the sacramental bread and wine is retained after the service – ‘reserved’. It is placed in a box on the wall near the Lord’s Table. A white light may burn above this box to signify the presence of the Sacrament. People are encouraged to kneel in front of this box as they pass, and to worship and adore it contents! (Outlawed by Article 28 – “The Sacrament of the Lord’s Supper was not by Christ’s ordinance reserved, carried about, lifted up or worshipped.”

5. Suspicious innovations in the service, regrettably allowed in variations within the Alternative Services Book (1980) such as the ‘Benedictus’ and the ‘Agnus Die’ when they follow immediately after the prayer of consecration or during the administration. There is nothing suspicious in the wording, rather it is in their position after consecration. This gives credence to the notion of a change in the bread and wine. (Occasionally words such as “this is the Lamb of God” are used after consecration). This is not sanctioned even in the ASB).

6. The minister encourages a superstitious veneration of the Lord’s Table. He calls it an ‘altar’ and bows before it. He encourages others to do the same. (The dangerous word ‘altar’ is carefully avoided in the Book of Common Prayer. Bowing to a table is idolatry.)

7. Again, it is allowed in the ASB to accompany the distribution of the bread and wine with the plain words – ‘the body of Christ’ – ‘the blood of Christ’. This tends towards the obvious error.

 

Behind these obvious tendencies towards the idea of a change in the bread and wine, there exists a whole range of apparent incidentals which serve to bolster the above practices. They are trifles; but pernicious trifles – the outward symptom of inward disease. Few churches are free from these phenomena – a result of the meticulous work of the Tractarian Movement in the last century. They often exist, even in evangelical churches, almost unnoticed: but they undoubtedly aid in the fostering of false doctrines and superstitious beliefs amongst the weak.

The following are noted as the more important:

a. A ‘sacred aura’ is contrived to hang around the Lord’s Table and the Chancel area. Candles may be placed on the Table, incense may be burnt, and a metal cross may be placed thereon.

b. The Lord’s Table itself is dressed up like a medieval ‘altar’: various hangings being draped around it.

c. An elaborate ceremonial in the Communion Service tends to heighten the idea of ‘mystery’.

d. The minister wears a special dress for communion: an alb, chasuble or stole, which he would not wear for matins or Evensong.

e. Wafers are substituted for ordinary bread in the Service. (This practice is disallowed in the Book of Common Prayer).

f. The sacrament is placed directly into the recipient’s mouth, not into his hands. (This practice is also disallowed in the Book of Common Prayer).

g. The people turn towards the east – the direction of the Lord’s Table – during the Creed. (This is an innovation which, like bowing at the mention of Jesus’ name, was given credence by William Laud in the seventeenth century).

 

It is sad to have to consider all the points noted in these lists, but truth must be spoken. When we look at the simple institution of Jesus, and the teaching of the New Testament, and when we look at the history of the Church, it should be clear to the unbiased mind that these things tend toward a departure from essential truth. They tend toward the nurturing and the fostering of the superstitious belief that the sacramental bread and wine change in some way at consecration. When such beliefs are embraced, most of the leading truths of the gospel come under attack. The Lord’s Supper is in danger of ceasing to be a sacrament – becoming a ‘sacrifice’ instead, so degrading our Lord’s one, perfect, finished sacrifice at Calvary (See Article 31). Similarly, once grant that there are ‘priests’ who can offer sacrifices to God, the Priestly Office of Christ is spoilt, and he is robbed of his glory. The doctrine of the Christian Ministry is also perverted when sinful men become Mediators between God and man. A vile form of idolatry is produced when men and women give to the sacramental bread and wine an honour and veneration which they were never meant to be given. Again, once grant that the body and blood of Christ can be present in any way on our Lord’s Table, (regardless of any clever use of words, e.g. ‘spiritually present’ or ‘sacramentally present’) the true doctrine of Christ’s humanity is overthrown. If the body and blood of Christ could be present on the Communion Table, in any way – corporally, really, essentially, spiritually, or sacramentally – then his body could not be really human and he could never have been a true man. This is a denial of the doctrine of the Manhood of Christ (See Article 21), (and Note at the end of the Communion, Book of Common Prayer).

 

When the significance of Jesus’ words in John, chapter 6 – “he who eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life” – is transferred to the sacramental bread and wine (the next progression of error), then the fundamental doctrine of Justification by Faith only is overthrown. Wrong views concerning the Lord’s Supper and the sacramental bread and wine can easily lead to a complete denial of the gospel. Well did Bishop Hooper say of the doctrine of Transubstantiation in the sixteenth century, before he was burned at the stake … “it is the darling of the devil, and the heir to Antichrist’s religion”. What of the true observance of the Lord’s Supper? The true observance as it commonly was in the first and second centuries AD, and as it was again at the Reformation in the doctrine and practice of the martyred reformers of the Church of England – a simple act of remembrance, with blessing expected and received through obedient participation and the vivid illustration to the mind of feeding on Christ which the Lord’s Supper provides.

 

There is a right reverence and dignity in which the Service should be conducted and entered into. The highest blessings should be expected when we truly feed on Christ in our hearts by faith, and when we faithfully obey Christ’s command – “Do this in remembrance of me”; but we are always inclined to seek after a more sensuous and showy religion. We must continually guard against false beliefs concerning the sacraments. We must check that our own observance is right, lest that which was ordained for our blessing should become our downfall and stumbling block.

 

The Church of England needs men and women with strong biblical convictions to stand up for the truth, to stand against error, and to fight for the reformed Protestant Church of England. She is in troubled waters – many are in ignorance, many are in error. If she is to survive as a church worth preserving, those who love the truth must stand firm on the hard won ground of the Reformers.

 

May Latimer’s candle continue to burn in England, and not be put out!